Should the price change? I don’t know but GB surely has metrics that answer that question. I do wonder if patreon-like tiers could help them get more objective feedback on the content they produce. It could also present the possibility to get support from folks who still see value in some, but not all of the premium content. Personally the flat fee has prevented me from resubscribing for the last few years because usually the most regular premium content, outside of podcasts, is often something I’m not interested in (I was serious when I said I was done with KH years ago). I wish the random game playdates happened more often so I could write off a week instead of a month or two.
As mentioned before, people are always re-evaluating the value of products they spend money on. People should stop saying those kind of conversations shouldn’t ever focus on Giant Bomb. The membership has been around too long to think their aren’t valid output comparisons to be made. The “This Day in Giant Bomb History” feature makes it painfully obvious how even “free content” like quick looks happened more often in previous years (Mondays may as well not exist anymore), it should not be considered out of line or surprising that one would start asking questions. The thought that someone should stop visiting GB if they aren’t willing to silently pay “only $35” is coming from a place of blind loyalty or ignorance. Should we erase from our minds the discussions by GB staff themselves where they complained about paying for a product that ended up having features taken away?
Log in to comment